Crossover for Bass

M

Mastermachetier

Member
Bass player here, gigging the FM3 since 2021. I love this unit. The sound quality and effects are legitimately best in class and nothing else I've played through touches it. But I have to be honest, I'm seriously looking at the Quad Cortex Mini, and the reason comes down to one thing.

The FM3 still doesn't have a crossover block.

For bass players, being able to split the signal and process highs and lows independently isn't a nice to have. It's fundamental to how modern bass tones are built.
I know the workaround with dual filter blocks and I've used it. It eats blocks on an already limited grid, the phase alignment isn't great, and it's just not the same as a proper crossover. Meanwhile the QC Mini has a dedicated crossover mode built right into its splitter block. That's hard to ignore.

I don't want to leave. I don't want a bigger unit. The FM3 form factor is perfect for my gig rig and I genuinely believe Fractal's amp modeling and effects are superior. But after nearly five years of gigging this platform, the lack of a crossover block is the one limitation that keeps pushing me to look elsewhere.

Any chance we see the crossover block come to the FM3? Even a simplified version would be a game changer for bass players.

Picture added for proper internet clout.
IMG_7507.jpg
 
I'm using two Filter blocks on the FM9T rather than the crossover so save some cpu. The 3-way crossover block is more than I really need, but would love to see a simple mono 2 way crossover block with common choices of slope (12dB, 24dB, etc.), and variable crossover point from 40hz to 5kHz or so, but would happily settle for a limited number of crossover points between 80Hz and 2.5kHz.

FWIW, I've not had any phase weirdness issues using the filter blocks to make a pseudo crossover, and been very happy with performance results for quite some time. But still, +1 on a simplified crossover block for bassists (maybe a lower-cost cpu hit option within the existing crossover block?).
 
jimfist said:
I'm using two Filter blocks on the FM9T rather than the crossover so save some cpu. The 3-way crossover block is more than I really need, but would love to see a simple mono 2 way crossover block with common choices of slope (12dB, 24dB, etc.), and variable crossover point from 40hz to 5kHz or so, but would happily settle for a limited number of crossover points between 80Hz and 2.5kHz.

FWIW, I've not had any phase weirdness issues using the filter blocks to make a pseudo crossover, and been very happy with performance results for quite some time. But still, +1 on a simplified crossover block for bassists (maybe a lower-cost cpu hit option within the existing crossover block?).
Click to expand...
This, u can split the signal and do some filter blocks, eliminating the high end in one and the low end in the other and viceversa
 
Mastermachetier said:
I know the workaround with dual filter blocks and I've used it. It eats blocks on an already limited grid
Click to expand...
I'm curious about this...in what way do you find the 4 x 12 grid limited (screenshot of one of your "loaded" presets)? I certainly hit cpu limitations (on the FM9T), but not layout limitations. Using 2 filters adds one block vs. the crossover. Don't get me wrong...a crossover block for the FM3 would be great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom